{"files"=>["https://ndownloader.figshare.com/files/801001"], "description"=>"<p>Condition of stimulation has a significant effect on both the time to event (solving the Type 2 insight problem) curves (p = 0.010, logrank test) and the percentage of subjects who solved the insight problem by the end of 6 minutes (p = 0.024, 2 tail fisher's exact test). While participants in all stimulation groups had difficulties in the first minute, after 150 seconds, only those in the L− R+ group continued to solve the insight problem over time. By the end of 360 seconds, 60% of those in the L− R+ stimulation group could solve the problem whereas only 20% of those in the sham stimulation group could do so (p = 0.022, two tail fisher's exact test).</p>", "links"=>[], "tags"=>["provides", "solving", "stimulation"], "article_id"=>471376, "categories"=>["Neuroscience"], "users"=>["Richard P. Chi", "Allan W. Snyder"], "doi"=>"https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016655.g002", "stats"=>{"downloads"=>1, "page_views"=>3, "likes"=>0}, "figshare_url"=>"https://figshare.com/articles/_The_figure_provides_a_comparison_of_problem_solving_performance_Type_2_insight_problem_across_stimulation_groups_/471376", "title"=>"The figure provides a comparison of problem solving performance (Type 2 insight problem) across stimulation groups.", "pos_in_sequence"=>0, "defined_type"=>1, "published_date"=>"2013-02-20 20:48:19"}

{"files"=>["https://ndownloader.figshare.com/files/801096"], "description"=>"<p>Values are presented as mean ± standard error of the mean. Participants across the three stimulation groups did not differ in terms of age (p = 0.19, ANOVA), time required in completing the mental set phase (p = 0.76, ANOVA) or experience in a quantitative field (p = 0.85, 2 tailed Fisher's exact test). It turned out that gender is not evenly distributed across the stimulation groups, with a few more females in the sham stimulation group. Nevertheless, it is clear from the data that gender is not a predictor of success in problem solving for either the Type 2 (p = 1, 2-tailed Fisher's exact test) or Type 3 (p = 0.58, 2-tailed Fisher's exact test) insight problem (see <a href=\"http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0016655#pone-0016655-t002\" target=\"_blank\">Table 2</a>).</p>", "links"=>[], "tags"=>["characteristics", "stimulation"], "article_id"=>471470, "categories"=>["Neuroscience"], "users"=>["Richard P. Chi", "Allan W. Snyder"], "doi"=>"https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016655.t001", "stats"=>{"downloads"=>5, "page_views"=>5, "likes"=>0}, "figshare_url"=>"https://figshare.com/articles/_Demographic_characteristics_across_the_three_stimulation_groups_/471470", "title"=>"Demographic characteristics across the three stimulation groups.", "pos_in_sequence"=>0, "defined_type"=>3, "published_date"=>"2013-02-20 20:48:48"}

{"files"=>["https://ndownloader.figshare.com/files/801056"], "description"=>"<p>We a priori did not intend to use the Type 3 insight problem to test our main hypothesis that those in the L− R+ group would perform better than those in the sham stimulation group. This is because those with brain lesion paradoxically perform better only for Type 2 problems, but not for Type 3 problems (Reveberi et al., 2007). Nevertheless, the result for the Type 3 problem is consistent with our hypothesis and also consistent with results for the Type 2 problem. Note that while the comparisons between L+ R− and sham (p = 0.15, logrank test) and between L+ R− and L− R+ (p = 0.26, logrank test) are not significant (possibly due to the lack of power), it is clear that those in the L− R+ group had a significant advantage over those in the sham stimulation group (p = 0.010, logrank test).</p>", "links"=>[], "tags"=>["provides", "solving", "stimulation"], "article_id"=>471427, "categories"=>["Neuroscience"], "users"=>["Richard P. Chi", "Allan W. Snyder"], "doi"=>"https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016655.g003", "stats"=>{"downloads"=>0, "page_views"=>3, "likes"=>0}, "figshare_url"=>"https://figshare.com/articles/_The_figure_provides_a_comparison_of_problem_solving_performance_Type_3_insight_problem_across_stimulation_groups_/471427", "title"=>"The figure provides a comparison of problem solving performance (Type 3 insight problem) across stimulation groups.", "pos_in_sequence"=>0, "defined_type"=>1, "published_date"=>"2013-02-20 20:48:34"}

{"files"=>["https://ndownloader.figshare.com/files/801121"], "description"=>"<p>Values are presented as mean ± standard error of the mean. Neither age (p = 0.255, 2 tailed independent t test), gender (p = 1, 2-tailed Fisher's exact test), time required in completing the mental set phase (p = 0.36, 2 tailed independent t test), or experience in a quantitative field (p = 0.36, 2-tailed Fisher's exact test) is a predictor of success in solving the Type 2 problem. In other words, there is no evidence that those in the L− R+ group had superior performance because of confounding baseline attributes.</p>", "links"=>[], "tags"=>["characteristics", "solving"], "article_id"=>471496, "categories"=>["Neuroscience"], "users"=>["Richard P. Chi", "Allan W. Snyder"], "doi"=>"https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016655.t002", "stats"=>{"downloads"=>1, "page_views"=>4, "likes"=>0}, "figshare_url"=>"https://figshare.com/articles/_Demographic_characteristics_of_those_who_were_successful_in_solving_the_Type_2_problem_vs_those_who_failed_/471496", "title"=>"Demographic characteristics of those who were successful in solving the Type 2 problem vs those who failed.", "pos_in_sequence"=>0, "defined_type"=>3, "published_date"=>"2013-02-20 20:48:57"}